[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: XKCD/541 compliance, anyone?
From: |
Marcin Borkowski |
Subject: |
Re: XKCD/541 compliance, anyone? |
Date: |
Thu, 08 Jan 2015 15:10:58 +0100 |
On 2015-01-08, at 04:11, Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
>>>> Do I get it correctly that it's better than my solution (basically,
>>>> (syntax-propertize (point-max)))
>>> The problem with your solution is "when?".
>> Say, in text-mode-hook (or similar)?
>
> No, that would be "where". Then "when" is something like "after opening
> the file", "after every command", "after a buffer modification", ...
Ah. I thought that if I set up this syntax-propertize-function thing,
things will happen after buffer modification automatically. (My –
admittedly limited – tests showed that this was indeed the case.)
I have to say that I'm more and more embarassed to ask somewhat stupid,
RTFM-style questions here. However, the part of the manual about syntax
parsing is not very verbose. Should I read the parts about font-lock to
understand better what's going on here?
> Stefan
Best,
--
Marcin Borkowski
http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski
Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science
Adam Mickiewicz University
- Re: XKCD/541 compliance, anyone?, (continued)
Re: XKCD/541 compliance, anyone?, Marcin Borkowski, 2015/01/02
Re: XKCD/541 compliance, anyone?, Marcin Borkowski, 2015/01/07
- Re: XKCD/541 compliance, anyone?, Stefan Monnier, 2015/01/07
- Re: XKCD/541 compliance, anyone?, Marcin Borkowski, 2015/01/07
- Re: XKCD/541 compliance, anyone?, Stefan Monnier, 2015/01/07
- Re: XKCD/541 compliance, anyone?, Marcin Borkowski, 2015/01/07
- Message not available
- Re: XKCD/541 compliance, anyone?, Stefan Monnier, 2015/01/07
- Re: XKCD/541 compliance, anyone?,
Marcin Borkowski <=